Regarding the tragic death of a young Jehovah's Witness mother, is this ...?

Question

a move in the right direction for the Jehovahs Witnesses. There is a group within the Organisation called "The Associated Witnesses for Reform on blood.
We are a group of Witnesses from many countries. Some members are presently serving as elders and Hospital Liason Commitee members or have previously served in that capacity.
Our objective is, to educate Jehovahs Witnesses, their family members, friends and healthcare providers regarding the irrational aspects of the Watchtower Societys policy on the use of blood and blood products. and to bring an end to a tragic and misguided policy which has claimed thousands of lives, many of them children."

For more information go to www.ajwrb.org

I am not aJehovahs Witness and I oppose nearly everything they do, but I welcome this move in their organisation.

Adams Rib
You call me a liar, well then go to the website I gave you. You know you are the stereotype Witness. The Governing body is getting younger these days and they will be getting rid of the old doctrines and the people who continue to preach them so be careful what you say.

Answer 1

Blood transfusions only began to be a matter of conscience after March 1998 when the Bulgarian government managed to get the Watchtower Society to agree not to sanction members who took blood (in order to be re-registered as a religion). The Society 'undertook with regard to its stance on blood transfusions to draft a statement for inclusion in its statute providing that members should have free choice in the matter for themselves and their children, without any control or sanction on the part of the association.'

It appears the Society has now had to offer the same assurances to its members world-wide, not just in Bulgaria. That is why its language has been toned down and [in print] no JW can be disfellowshipped for refusing a b.t. In practice, however, a JW who accepts 'disapproved' blood products must repent - THEN he will not be disfellowshipped! So an unrepentant JW WILL be kicked out! And they say there are no longer any sanctions?!? A 1991 Watchtower continued to advocate shunning tactics against those who chose to leave.

The Watchtower Society says they have written to all elders world-wide re. not dis'shipping 'repentant' JWs and 'merely' viewing 'unrepentant' ones as having disassociated themselves. But was that notification a confidential document, for elders only? Some of those elders would also be in hospital liaison groups dealing with clinicians and JWs needing blood. Were those JWs told in advance of their refusing blood that if they accepted blood they could avoid being dis'shipped if they professed regret afterwards? What if some of those JWs died before being so informed? Apparently elders have known since April 1999. But have rank and file members been clearly told about their allegedly new freedom from fear of sanctions? If they had, would some of them - faced with needing a b.t. - have taken it? Could some lives have been saved if the Society had openly changed its policy for all to see in April 1999? Where is their published article saying clearly that there are NO sanctions whatever against those who exercise freedom of conscience to have a b.t.? As long as any sanctions exist, there is no freedom of conscience!

Answer 2

Numerous translators of the Christian Greek Scriptures (New Testament) therefore translate Peter’s words at Acts 5:30 to read: “The God of our forefathers raised up Jesus, whom you slew, hanging him upon a stake [or, “tree,” according to the King James Version, New International Version, The Jerusalem Bible, and Revised Standard Version].” You might also wish to check how your Bible translates xy′lon at: Acts 10:39; 13:29; Galatians 3:13; and 1 Peter 2:24. The book The Non-Christian Cross adds: “There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros [pole or stake]; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross.” Christ could well have been impaled on a form of crux (stau·ros′) known as the crux simplex. That was how such a stake was illustrated by the Roman Catholic scholar Justus Lipsius of the 16th century.

Answer 3

I am not a Jehovah's Witness I am pro choice I know that in these emotionally charged cases people almost feel we should reject other people's wishes be it for religious reasons or for any reason..... but the law in the UK states that capable adults may refuse treatment at any time ( by the way the refusal of treatment even if it would save your life is not the definition of mental incapacity.. the law is very clear on this...)
Children are treated differently under UK law and doctors may continue treatment against a parent's wishes ....
People should have the right to chose and not feel pressured by religion, or the state, or the views of others ....

Answer 4

This certainly is a tough situation, the bible instruction is there thats for sure!!

The problem is basically human emotion...How to take the take the information in the bible? No doubt about it "abstain" means desist, refrain, withdraw, withhold, etc...anyway its clear the bible says all that for "blood" If the WT knows then(I dont mean to be a critic) why have fluctuations in policy?

That only leads me to think that, although a noble cause, to make their adherents aware of the advancement in 'technology' but saying "No" then "Yes" is inconsistent. And since the adherents look up to the WT magazines they look for guidance, its scary to think that a life probable situation could have been avoided if the "yes" was in affect. Keep in mind Im still researching and I dont want to step over the boundaries of being an opposer of some sort.

It's my understanding that really reading the scriptures and trying to understand the Almighty personality plays a huge roll in one's thoughts. I look at Abraham's example of sacrificing his son and, at first glimpse anyone (including me) would think the God of this madman isn't a loving God! I could just imagine how many critics!!

Im still looking things up but I see both sides of the argument and it all comes down to really understanding the scriptures. Why? Because it teaches that god's thoughts are different than our's (Doctors, Lawyers, Scientist and everyone...)\

Take Care Everybody

Answer 5

Thank you for the information. The rejection of a life saving blood transfusion in a case like this is criminal, in my opinion, so any attempt to reverse the policy is to be applauded but I'm not holding my breath that reason will prevail in such a weird sect.

Answer 6

I applaud this move definitely. I once had a Jehovahs witness knock on my door and I bet they wish they hadnt. You see my son was born extremely prem and was very ill. If it werent for several dozen blood transfusions he would not be here today. He is also disabled. Before she could start reeling off her words about 'do you believe in god?' etc..... I bought my son to the door. I asked if she could see my son. And said to her that if it werent for blood transfusions my son would be dead. (She looked embarrassed) I told her not to talk to me about God, because if there was one my son wpouldnt have needed transfusions and wouldnt have any disabilties. Thanks to blood transfusions, bothme and my son are alive and well. Please Jehovahs rethink. Religion isnt the be all and end all. Your children need parents and vice versa.

Answer 7

They CLAIM they were on the Liason committee. They have hidden their identities- how do you KNOW who really is behind that site?

We get slandered and misrepresented every other day and we have learnt that you never know who is behind a site and why.

Our official website is www.watchtower.org.


EDIT: Anyone see a Noisy Goat run this way???

Answer 8

I'm glad to see that this is happening. Today's blood supply in the U.S. is safer than ever before because of the thorough prescreening of donors and testing of the blood that is donated to ensure its safety.

Answer 9

Death is unnatural, and saddens every reasonable person. It seems crass, however, to turn a tragic death into a platform for one's opinionated rantings.

No, the so-called "AWR" aren't 'moving in the right direction', nor are they actual Jehovah's Witnesses.

This tragedy occurred nearly two weeks ago, on October 25, 2007. Despite what pro-blood activists and anti-Witness critics might pretend, her doctors informed the family that Mrs. Gough would have died even if she had received blood transfusions.

That's little consolation, but it is unsurprising.

During a hemorrhagic event, artificial expanders almost always work better than blood itself at keeping veins and arteries from collapsing. In addition, targeted treatment of specific blood fractions is considered preferable to old-fashioned "throw everything at it and see what sticks" thinking of whole blood transfusions. Of course, Jehovah's Witnesses generally accept artificial products and fractions derived from plasma, platelets, and red/white cells.

Since Jehovah's Witnesses only refuse whole blood and its four major components, doctors still have many many proven products and techniques. In fact, many or most doctors have come to prefer these products and techniques for ALL their patients.


It is not Jehovah's Witnesses who decide that blood is sacred. It is Almighty God who declares it so, as the Divine Author of the Holy Bible!

As God's spokesman and as Head of the Christian congregation, Jesus Christ made certain that the early congregation reiterated, recorded, and communicated renewed Christian restrictions against the misuse of blood.

Jehovah's Witnesses are not anti-medicine or anti-technology, and they do not have superstitious ideas about some immortal "soul" literally encapsulated in blood. Instead, as Christians, the Witnesses seek to obey the very plain language of the bible regarding blood.

As Christians, they are bound by the bible's words in "the Apostolic Decree". Ironically, this decree was the first official decision communicated to the various congregations by the twelve faithful apostles (and a handful of other "older men" which the apostles had chosen to add to the first century Christian governing body in Jerusalem). God and Christ apparently felt (and feel) that respect for blood is quite important.

Here is what the "Apostolic Decree" said, which few self-described Christians obey or even respect:

(Acts 15:20) Write them [the various Christian congregations] to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.

(Acts 15:28-29) For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper.


Quite explicitly, the Apostolic Decree plainly forbids the misuse of blood by Christians (despite the fact that nearly every other provision of former Jewish Mosaic Law was recognized as unnecessary). It seems odd therefore, that literally one Christian religion continues to teach that humans must not use blood for any purpose other than honoring Almighty God.

A better question would ask: How can other self-described Christian religions justify the fact that they don't even care if their adherents drink blood and eat blood products?


Jehovah's Witnesses recognize the repeated bible teaching that blood is specially "owned" by God, and must not be used for any human purpose. Witnesses do not have any superstitious aversion to testing or respectfully handling blood, and Witnesses believe these Scriptures apply to blood and the four primary components which approximate "blood". An individual Jehovah's Witness is likely to accept a targeted treatment for a targeted need, including a treatment which includes a minor fraction derived from plasma, platelets, and/or red/white blood cells.

Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/hb/index.htm?article=article_07.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/vcnb/article_01.htm

Answer 10

I just want to say-- well done! I'm glad someone within the JW's is actually taking a stand against this ridiculous belief. I wish you every sucess!